Permit me to rant. Why do the State not adopt 'if you don't pay, you don't stay' legislation so it does not take months to evict non-paying Tenant?
The SW equivalent in USA does not allow unruly tenants get away with poor conduct. It has a ‘one strike’ policy so if you abuse your 1st chance under SW, you never get re-housed again in the whole country. If a problem, tenant has 30 days to rectify the issue. If they fail to comply, SW are immediately notified and brought in to evict the tenant. This has improved SW Tenants’ conduct. Socially minded citizens may frown on this, I understand but it is injustice to Landlords here with current legislation. Maybe these Irish laws were enacted when Landlords had no mortgage, they were feudal lords, etc. Many of today's landlords are just months rent's loss from bankruptcy, loss of asset etc. and need protection from increasing Govt charges, banks repossession, bad tenants, SW policies, lop-sided laws. I understand good Tenants being protected, but why protect interest of someone that does not pay and usurping SW rent.
If such protection is justified, then it should be extended to Landlords too. Everyone is always saying that it is the system but is it not the people that created the system? If State so want to protect bad Tenant's interest, why at the expense of Landlord? State prefer Landlord to absorb the hit. It is like robbing Peter to pay Paul. The court judgment that should offer succour is no good when Tenant is ordered to pay €5/ month or Tenant refuses to pay or runs away.
If in the spirit of laudable social policies, this protection is justified, then how about Govt setting aside money pot (from sale of National Lottery licence for example) to offset landlord’s loss for as long as the State feels the non-paying Tenant should be protected. That is equitable and would create equilibrium. Tenant is protected, Landlord is not robbed, Banks do not suffer default. Pros here should outweigh whatever cons there are.
What sort of protection does someone who pockets SW rent deserve? If you report Tenant usurping your rent, maybe they do stop Tenant’s dole (as per some posts) but they also stop the rent they pay to you as it happened in my own case.
My friend’s Tenant ran off with months’ rent while case was with PRTB. Due to data protection, PRTB cannot look into SW record to check Tenant’s current address from where she draws her dole. They asked my friend to get Tenant’s current address for them so they know where to address their letters. So PRTB cannot look up Tenant’s record but yet share Landlord’s data with Revenue, Local councils etc. Is it such a bad idea to create exceptions in Data protection so that if you are are a cheat, you lose some of your rights? This would check unruly Tenants who run away with unpaid rent from one house only to resume same act in another.
I remember I once had Data protection issue with Utility companies too. Tenant racked up unpaid bills and left (before meters became an option). Bord Gais disconnected service. I had to pay for reconnection charges so new tenant is serviced. Not to be beaten twice, I proactively called Bord Gais after some months to check if there is any mounting bill on the property. BordGais said they could not tell me due to Data protection. So if the same practice is repeated, I would need to fork out another reconnection charge. I even implored that they should not tell me anything other than confirm if Tenant is owing but they would not. I know some people reading this would wonder why I do not ask Tenant. It is because most are not encouraged to give you and wonder why you are even asking when it is not your name on the bill. So it seems the law and Data protection seem to serve the bad guy more.